Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Bogart, 717 P.2d 449.

58 citing documents.

AMERICAN FAMILY MUT. INS. v. Continental Cas. 23 P.3d 664 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
AMERICAN FAMILY MUT. INS. v. Continental Cas. 23 P.3d 664 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Allstate Ins. Co. v. GREAT AMERICAN INS. COS. 4 P.3d 991 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Allstate Ins. Co. v. GREAT AMERICAN INS. COS. 4 P.3d 991 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
-50 , -54 (1986) (escape clause and excess clause were mutually repugnant, "chas[ing] each other through infinity," and loss had to be prorated between insurers).
Allstate Insurance v. Great American Insurance Companies 4 P.3d 991 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Allstate Insurance v. Great American Insurance Companies 4 P.3d 991 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
-50 , -54 (1986) (escape clause and excess clause were mutually repugnant, “chas[ing] each other through infinity,” and loss had to be prorated between insurers).
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Arrington 963 P.2d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Arrington 963 P.2d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
-47, 153 , -51, 457 (1986)(requiring prorated payments from two additional carriers when the amount of the judgment exceeded the primary coverage limit of the self-insured car rental agency).
Ah v. Arizona Prop. and Cas. Ins. Guar. 943 P.2d 738 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Ah v. Arizona Prop. and Cas. Ins. Guar. 943 P.2d 738 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
A.H. v. Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund 943 P.2d 738 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
A.H. v. Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund 943 P.2d 738 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Nahom v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc. 885 P.2d 1113 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Nahom v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc. 885 P.2d 1113 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
(discusses history of “other insurance” clauses; conflicting clauses unenforceable to amount of loss; loss pro-rated).
Cole v. Standard Fire Insurance 880 P.2d 714 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Cole v. Standard Fire Insurance 880 P.2d 714 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Averett v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 869 P.2d 505 Ariz. 1994
Averett v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 869 P.2d 505 Ariz. 1994
we said: It is true that an oral representation contrary to the words in the written instrument may qualify as either a fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation, but Darner does not by its terms limit itself to misrepresentation actions.
John Deere Insurance v. West American Insurance Group 854 P.2d 1201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
John Deere Insurance v. West American Insurance Group 854 P.2d 1201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Consolidated Enterprises, Inc. v. Schwindt 833 P.2d 706 Ariz. 1992
Consolidated Enterprises, Inc. v. Schwindt 833 P.2d 706 Ariz. 1992
and of the legislature’s ensuing amendment to § 28-324(B), will help to illustrate this point and to dispel any confusion regarding the meaning of “self-insurer” in the context of this statute.
Do by Minker v. Farmers Ins. Co. 828 P.2d 1254 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Distinguished Do by Minker v. Farmers Ins. Co. 828 P.2d 1254 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
that the doctrine applied even in the absence of any misrepresentations.
Fremont Indemnity Co. v. New England Reinsurance Co. 815 P.2d 403 Ariz. 1991
Fremont Indemnity Co. v. New England Reinsurance Co. 815 P.2d 403 Ariz. 1991
Consolidated Enterprises, Inc. v. Schwindt 831 P.2d 828 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Consolidated Enterprises, Inc. v. Schwindt 831 P.2d 828 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
impose upon a rental agency the responsibility to the public not to rent a car without insurance or the financial ability to respond to a claim for damages arising from operation of the rental car.
Schultz v. Farmers Insurance Group of Companies 805 P.2d 381 Ariz. 1991
Schultz v. Farmers Insurance Group of Companies 805 P.2d 381 Ariz. 1991
(escape clause in liability policy repugnant to excess clause so both provided primary coverage).
Fremont Indemnity Co. v. New England Reinsurance Co. 799 P.2d 862 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
Fremont Indemnity Co. v. New England Reinsurance Co. 799 P.2d 862 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
which requires a contrary result.
Rashid v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 787 P.2d 1066 Ariz. 1990
Rashid v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 787 P.2d 1066 Ariz. 1990
Brown v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 788 P.2d 56 Ariz. 1989
Brown v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 788 P.2d 56 Ariz. 1989
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wilson 782 P.2d 727 Ariz. 1989
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wilson 782 P.2d 727 Ariz. 1989
Darner, 140 Ariz. at 393 , 682 P.2d at 398 .
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Dimmer 773 P.2d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Dimmer 773 P.2d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
-52 , -56 (1986), the court stated: Darner does not stand for the narrow proposition that § 211 is simply a remedy for misrepresentation.
Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. CNA Insurance 767 P.2d 716 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. CNA Insurance 767 P.2d 716 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Robson v. Hartford Insurance Group 751 P.2d 563 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Robson v. Hartford Insurance Group 751 P.2d 563 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Herder 751 P.2d 519 Ariz. 1988
Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Herder 751 P.2d 519 Ariz. 1988
Green v. Mid-America Preferred Insurance Co. 751 P.2d 581 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Green v. Mid-America Preferred Insurance Co. 751 P.2d 581 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
which held that the language in an insurance policy that the customer “is not ordinarily expected to read or understand ought not to be allowed to contradict the bargain made by the parties,” and that the declarations page is evidence of the “dickered deal,” which cannot be contradicted by the p
Gordinier v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 742 P.2d 277 Ariz. 1987
Gordinier v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 742 P.2d 277 Ariz. 1987
(“other insurance” clause unenforceable because it defeated the insured’s reasonable expectations); , (as a matter of law, pamphlet given to insureds before they purchased insurance created expectations of coverage), cert